Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Divided opinion between Sunderland fans about both our goals and who was better side
Comments
-
It's the pass to Taylor that they are claiming is offside. Not Taylor but players on the far side. Don't seem to understand phases of play.Henry Irving said:Whats laughable are the offside claims.
Purrington, and Pratley, are clearly behind the ball but because they are ahead of the defenders some mackems think they are offside.
Stanley Mathews never set up a goal by that reasoning.0 -
The Sunderland defending was equally laughable. Purrington got away from his marker so easily it was embarrassing. The bloke just stood there like a lemon and waved his arms about like it was somebody else's fault after the goal went in.Henry Irving said:Whats laughable are the offside claims.
Purrington, and Pratley, are clearly behind the ball but because they are ahead of the defenders some mackems think they are offside.
Stanley Mathews never set up a goal by that reasoning.1 -
Here are my thoughts.
i don’t give a toss. To those Sunderland fans reading this who have been gracious - thanks, and good luck next year.6 -
I don’t like to even hear the remotest doubt voiced (especially by a fellow Addick), about one of the most iconic goals in Addicks history....particularly when there are likely to be Sunderland fans reading this, thus giving them tacit support for their ridiculous sour grapes claims.Lordflashheart said:
Not at all - all I am saying is that I think there are refs out there who would have blown up and said the Sunderland defender was fouled because he was smothered by the Charlton playerSoundAsa£ said:
Nonsense!Lordflashheart said:Agree - some total bells on there - some good posters as well
However, in terms of our winning goal I think there are some refs out there who would have disallowed it due to the challenge in the box
I'm not saying I agree, just that some would have done that
I can see how others would see it that way - I don't agree - but I could see it happening
I don’t think it was anything more than the normal “rough & tumble” that goes on in the penalty box from crosses where there are quite a few players of each side.....there really was nothing in it.
Great goal, sorry Lfh, anyone who says or infers otherwise is talking rubbish.
We beat ‘em fair and square.
BAUER IN THE 94th!2 -
94th wasn’t it?SoundAsa£ said:
I don’t like to even hear the remotest doubt voiced (especially by a fellow Addick), about one of the most iconic goals in Addicks history....particularly when there are likely to be Sunderland fans reading this, thus giving them tacit support for their ridiculous sour grapes claims.Lordflashheart said:
Not at all - all I am saying is that I think there are refs out there who would have blown up and said the Sunderland defender was fouled because he was smothered by the Charlton playerSoundAsa£ said:
Nonsense!Lordflashheart said:Agree - some total bells on there - some good posters as well
However, in terms of our winning goal I think there are some refs out there who would have disallowed it due to the challenge in the box
I'm not saying I agree, just that some would have done that
I can see how others would see it that way - I don't agree - but I could see it happening
I don’t think it was anything more than the normal “rough & tumble” that goes on in the penalty box from crosses where there are quite a few players of each side.....there really was nothing in it.
Great goal, sorry Lfh, anyone who says or infers otherwise is talking rubbish.
We beat ‘em fair and square.
BAUER IN THE 93rd!0 -
We was by far the better team in possession more threatening even after they brang mcgeady on there attacking play was woefull
Enjoy another year in league 10 -
you can tell how much of a foul it was by their reaction. If it was actually a foul, I think they may have been a bit more in the ref and linesmans faces - as it was, a couple of arms went up and that was it...3
-
All I have said is that I think there are some refs who would have said it was a foul - I haven't said I think it was, because I dontSoundAsa£ said:
I don’t like to even hear the remotest doubt voiced (especially by a fellow Addick), about one of the most iconic goals in Addicks history....particularly when there are likely to be Sunderland fans reading this, thus giving them tacit support for their ridiculous sour grapes claims.Lordflashheart said:
Not at all - all I am saying is that I think there are refs out there who would have blown up and said the Sunderland defender was fouled because he was smothered by the Charlton playerSoundAsa£ said:
Nonsense!Lordflashheart said:Agree - some total bells on there - some good posters as well
However, in terms of our winning goal I think there are some refs out there who would have disallowed it due to the challenge in the box
I'm not saying I agree, just that some would have done that
I can see how others would see it that way - I don't agree - but I could see it happening
I don’t think it was anything more than the normal “rough & tumble” that goes on in the penalty box from crosses where there are quite a few players of each side.....there really was nothing in it.
Great goal, sorry Lfh, anyone who says or infers otherwise is talking rubbish.
We beat ‘em fair and square.
BAUER IN THE 94th!2 -
I agree, some refs may have said it was. I think most would say handbags and give the goal. The ref on Sunday had a good game I thought.0
-
Terrible (tired) defending for the winner too - watch it again and notice Cattermole and Honeyman picking up no one at the edge of the box while Oviedo is overloaded.Missed It said:
The Sunderland defending was equally laughable. Purrington got away from his marker so easily it was embarrassing. The bloke just stood there like a lemon and waved his arms about like it was somebody else's fault after the goal went in.Henry Irving said:Whats laughable are the offside claims.
Purrington, and Pratley, are clearly behind the ball but because they are ahead of the defenders some mackems think they are offside.
Stanley Mathews never set up a goal by that reasoning.
Smart run by Bauer though.2 - Sponsored links:
-
Oviedo doesn't want it as much as Pearce and Bauer, that's the simple truth5
-
First goal was offside
Second goal was a mugging
None of the Sunderland players should have been booked
Bauer handled the ball in the box
Bauer should have been sent off
Pratley should have been sent off
At least 4 other Charlton players should have been booked
Bowyer's a mag
Referee was obviously a Charlton fan
All the Championship teams put pressure on the EFL as they didn't want Sunderland to go up
Some great opinions there, so how about a fact?
CHARLTON 2 SUNDERLAND 1
17 -
I think there goal was offside but was given 🕶Addickted said:First goal was offside
Second goal was a mugging
None of the Sunderland players should have been booked
Bauer handled the ball in the box
Bauer should have been sent off
Pratley should have been sent off
At least 4 other Charlton players should have been booked
Bowyer's a mag
Referee was obviously a Charlton fan
All the Championship teams put pressure on the EFL as they didn't want Sunderland to go up
Some great opinions there, so how about a fact?
CHARLTON 2 SUNDERLAND 12 -
We gave them a goal head start and played poorly for the first 30 mins or so and still won. We deserved it.
I like Sunderland, really decent group of fans and a big club who should not be in L1. But they are there so their fans should enjoy visiting some new grounds next year and then hopefully go up as Champions as they did the last time we beat them in a play off final. For teams of their size and support L1 is not forever.4 -
Most Sunderland fans accept the result.
When they were gifted a lead and then blew it what else can they say?
That early O.G. was the sweetest of sweet grapes for them.0 -
My favourite quote from that site 'First goal was offside. Not when the ball was played in but about three seconds before there were two players, (including the scorer), who were offside. Flag should have been up, there and then'Callumcafc said:
Nah they’re saying that Purrington was in an offside position when Dijksteel flicked the ball on toward Taylor. Different phases though, that stopped being offside some years ago.Henry Irving said:Whats laughable are the offside claims.
Purrington, and Pratley, are clearly behind the ball but because they are ahead of the defenders some mackems think they are offside.
Stanley Mathews never set up a goal by that reasoning.2 -
It was a massive game for the ref and he allowed a couple of fouls to go unpunished early doors. Compared to Kettle, Lingington and Stroud he was superb.
He didn't let the big crowd influence him even though I thought he had left his cards in the dressing room until he booked the Nabster.
Charlton fans can moan for England so no problem with the sour grapes from some wearsiders, Otherwise they have to accept that when they sold their main striker in January they were left with a blunt attack which would explain why they had so many low scoring draws.
0 -
Moaning is one thing. Being delusional and just a tit head is quite another. Trying to be completely objective for a moment and If I was a Sunderland fan I would really be disappointed that my team was generally so negative and didn’t give it a good go. Over the season 19 draws and the Chekatrade final seems to point to that being how Ross wants to play. Get in front and then hang on.
I think that their fans need to listen to Michael Grays comments. He is a Mackem and called the game pretty spot on. Sunderland weren’t good or adventurous enough and they got the result that fits in with that.
As an aside. I think Jack Ross won’t be there after Christmas next season.
9 -
Yup. The undeniable fact is that they should have punished us after the OG whilst we were still shaky. But they didn’t. Negative tactics which contributed to their defeat.ShootersHillGuru said:Moaning is one thing. Being delusional and just a tit head is quite another. Trying to be completely objective for a moment and If I was a Sunderland fan I would really be disappointed that my team was generally so negative and didn’t give it a good go. Over the season 19 draws and the Chekatrade final seems to point to that being how Ross wants to play. Get in front and then hang on.
I think that their fans fans need to listen to Michael Grays comments. He is a Mackem and called the game pretty spot on. Sunderland weren’t good or adventurous enough and they got the result that fits in with that.
As an aside. I think Jack Ross won’t be there after Christmas next season.
They did not score a goal ... without scoring they cannot win.1 -
Christ, that Morpeth Mackem is a little treasure isn't he. I wonder if he's their version of Acworth?
5 - Sponsored links:
-
He knew he'd lost the battle against Pearce so threw himself to the ground, was so theatrical he was never going to get something from the refRothko said:Oviedo doesn't want it as much as Pearce and Bauer, that's the simple truth
If Sunderland fans have issue they should be berating Ozturk for hauling Parker to the ground for the free-kick
Josh was going no where, just contain him and force him to pass the ball backwards!!2 -
Their defending was piss poor. To leave a man free on the back post and concede once is bad, but to do it twice in the same game, and in an absolutely massive game, is awful.
Thought we were the only side that went forward with any purpose. How good is it to say that, finally after the last few years.1 -
They are not alone , as football supporters, that seem to base their interpretation of the offside laws to something they remember from their youth.
I remember QPR getting offside decisions 2 yards in their own half. The laws changed over the years to stop this negative play but it has made it harder for the officials who have to take in a large amount of information.
The second goal players challenged for the ball, inevitably they fall over.
There was no offside for our first goal and there was no foul for the winning goal.1 -
Talal said:
It's the pass to Taylor that they are claiming is offside. Not Taylor but players on the far side. Don't seem to understand phases of play.Henry Irving said:Whats laughable are the offside claims.
Purrington, and Pratley, are clearly behind the ball but because they are ahead of the defenders some mackems think they are offside.
Stanley Mathews never set up a goal by that reasoning.
They're not the only ones!0 -
I think they're completely ignoring the fact that Sarr was offside when he scores: When Purrington plays the ball back to him, he is at least five yards in front of Power (and Bielik is even further offside) when he neatly slots the ball past Phillips.
Right in front of the linesman as well.
7 -
Who gives a f*** what they think. We are and we’re the better side all season, so now f*** off and enjoy another season in league one😜1
-
We came 3rd in the league and proved to be the 3rd best team over the season, we deserved to go up. End of
2 -
I’ve given it some thought 7 -
(Naively !!) I thought posters on here would simply be interested in others take on our winner (ignoring the idiots on their website), and perhaps debate my view that there are refs out there who would have given a foul against us (which would have had us up in arms- me included)
Never mind - it was simply a discussion - nothing more - onward !!0 -
They had a golden opportunity to take the game to us after Naby and Dillon finished mucking about. They didn't. They allowed us to come back into it, allowed us to get a goal back, then after half time, when you would have thought they would have come out all guns blazing, particularly as the game was all or nothing in terms of how the season will pan out. But they didn't. They were poor in the first half, poor in the second half, and we deserved to win overall, and we did.6
